Nathan's Insights

On the very day I’m leaving for 5 months I’m thinking about the Australian Governments Work Choices legislation and I’m wondering what type of country Australia is turning into.  The changes that start this week will have a lasting effect on all Australians.   Work Choices is about giving employers the choice of what conditions they offer you and in employers with less than 100 employees the right to terminate you without reason (i.e. being a whinger etc).   It is not about choices to employees.     The Age today had a story about an employer dismissing staff who were union members and who had previously been on strike (those members who resigned from the union are still working).  The changes in the short term will see staff be sacked and in a lot of cases re-employed as a casual on a lot less money and/or reduced conditions.   Conditions I know from family and friends already being reduced include penalty rates, travel allowances, meal allowances and overtime.   Individuals have made long term financial decisions based on security on employment and their expected wage.   There are already many people who are facing ruin.   Why is the Government doing this, because they hate employees and unions, no (well they don’t like unions).   They believe that by allowing employers to reduce costs that the employers might employ more staff.   In the long term this means that there would be less unemployed the Government has to support which ultimately means more money in the Government budget for tax cuts or investment in infrastructure.

One possible problem with this plan as it appears to think employers will do the right thing by employees and exist for this purpose.   But law corporations exist to increase the value and returns to the investors, nothing else.   This gamble might work; I can’t be sure however it is only a theory and has never been proven.   While the Government takes this gamble for the possible long term good a sizeable part of the workplace definitely suffer now.   The chance to see your children on the weekend will be reduced and you won’t get the benefit of getting extra money.  A best this gamble might help some Australians (especially business owners) but those earning less than $45,000 a year or working for an employer with less than 100 employees are in for a very rough ride.   Again the engine room of Australia is being asked to take the most pain for the select few.

As the award system is dismantled and more and more employers can offer less for more work the real cost will be felt.   Having said this JohnHoward’s middle Australia will only start feeling the effects when current workplace agreements are reviewed over the next 3 years, happily after the next election for the Liberal Government.   The election calculation is the young and the lower paid who will get hurt first don’t vote from them anyway, those who benefit do.    It’s important that even those who think they might be protected (like me) say and do something now.

We are all Australians and we need to support each other away from the sporting field.

Well my tennis team lost Saturday’s Semi-Final by 2 games.   This was not only my last event as captain but also probably my last at the Mt Carmel Tennis Club.  I couldn’t ask for a better group.   We were expected to finish last but ended up 3rd and 2 games out of a grand final.   Congratulations to everyone.

Well it had to eventually be bought up again, the Attorney-General Philip Ruddock has suggested that we need a National ID Card.   While it is interesting that the Liberal’s stopped a similar idea in the 1980s when Labour wanted to bring it in it is more interesting how the Government treats our personal details.

Now I actually don’t think introducing the ID card is really a big issue (or even linking it to terrorism, like that is really going to stop anyone).   We already basically have an id card, be it a driver’s license, passport,  Medicare Card or  concession card  (student or otherwise).

No Mr Ruddock is missing the real point, or at least hiding it in plain view:  A lot of people say an ID card would be dreadful, that this would enable the Government to have access to a wider range of information and you wouldn’t want to trust government with all of that information.   I would simply say that government obtains all that information . . . now.

The government already has all this information on you!  In the past government departments didn’t share most of their data, they protected it (sometimes more by ineptitude than design) however now with better technology and ‘special’ agreements your information is widely available.

The real issue is not the ID card but the information that is already been held and its use.   Maybe the ID card isn’t such a bad idea if we get real safe guards.   For example shouldn’t we be able to see who accessed our information (and not under a costly Freedom of Information request).   Shouldn’t we be able to at any time request to see all data held on us?   You’d be surprised how much is wrong, the Depart. of Immigration uses police databases and based on this locks citizens up.

No the real issue isn’t the ID card.   I’d even support the ID if we had real safe guards and remove the need for the other id cards while you are at it, we might as well get something out of this.  

While this site won’t normally become a political commentary forum, my good friend Adrian has inspired me to put down some of my thoughts about what is really happening in the international world.    A lot of people have linked the war in Iraq with oil, WMDs or even to the failure of George Bush Snr in the first Iraq war however I think there is something much more straight forward going on.

As a rule the powerful like to stay powerful and in the modern world that is achieved by two things economic and military might.   And while I feel the invasion was to show the world they had the will and the means to invade anyone they don’t like (sending the terrorist a message just like did after the Munich Olympics murders) there is a greater economic reason.  Most people are aware that the USA has incredible deficits.   The country is only saved from a major financial crisis by the fact everyone else in the world is willing to invest in their country but most importantly buy their dollars.

In November 2000 the Iraq Government decided to stop using the US dollar for it’s international purchases or to sell it’s oil (under the discredited food for oil problem).   This decision was mostly made for political reasons however it showed the world that there was an alternative to the US dollar, the European dollar (or euro).   This decision actually made the Iraq people a lot of money because as a consequence the US dollar fell (see UK Guardian article).

Unfortunately for the Iraq government just as the US government would later make a military example of them under the same principle the US could not afford to let make an economic example for the rest of the world.   This could lead to the new domino effect of other OPEC countries doing the same.     The consequences of all OPEC nations suddenly changing to the euro is summed up in this quote:   “..the effect of an OPEC switch to the euro would be that oil-consuming nations would have to flush dollars out of their (central bank) reserve funds and replace these with Euros.  The dollar would crash anywhere from 20-40% in value and the consequences would be those one could expect from any currency collapse and massive inflation (think Argentina currency crisis, for example). You’d have foreign funds stream out of the U.S. stock markets and dollar denominated assets, there’d surely be a run on the banks much like the 1930s, the current account deficit would become unserviceable, the budget deficit would go into default, and so on. Your basic third world economic crisis scenario.

The United States economy is intimately tied to the dollar’s role as reserve currency. This doesn’t mean that the U.S. couldn’t function otherwise, but that the transition would have to be gradual to avoid such dislocations (and the ultimate result of this would probably be the U.S. and the E.U. switching roles in the global economy).”     This quote is included in the excellent essay written by William Clark in January 2003 and revised in March 2003 which I strongly recommend people read to understand the major reasons for interference around the world.     By all rights the US should not be able to live the life it currently does, it’s major export is US dollars and it’s citizens current living standards are based on the rest of the world underwriting it.   It’s also worth noting that while the US has supported the European Union in the past they did not support the common currency.  Any country that could affect trade volumes that tried to move away from the US dollar will face very serious consequences.   The moment that Venezuela moves to the Euro this democratically elected government will be removed.

If it was all about WMDs North Korea would have been invaded first.  A war is been waged right now and it is very much about economic power and ensuring that the US stays on top.   It’s a war that affects all countries including Australia (watch what would happen if we tried to introduce a pacific dollar).   If the free market really ruled China and India would now be running the place as they have the most productive goods the rest of the world wants.   Other more recent articles on this issue include:

War is Money by Mark Radulich